Comment by monocasa

> Generally speaking, a bunch of Russian silos lighting up would put us at DEFCON 1. We’re not waiting until it passes Ukraine. It we want to engage any boost-phase ABM, we’re not going to let it. (Which leads to its own issues.)

I already said they'd be at DEFCON 1.

> At some point. But waiting will cost you precious minutes, and you don’t know what else is in position e.g. off your coast.

Waiting might also keep you out of a nuclear war. They know exactly how long they can wait.

> I was unclear. I meant conventional forces that would be targets in a first strike.

Convential forces are inconsequential wrt a full nuclear strike.

> Strategic retaliation for tactical nukes has not been normalized. This is still entirely ambiguous and hotly debated.

I already quoted you the exact policy from one of your examples.

> Again, flip it around. If you knew China and Russia would stand down if they thought you were just nuking North Korea, you could use that to gain material advantage in a first strike.

If you were retaliating because NK had already set off a tactical nuke in your territory? Once again, the orbital mechanics don't work like that. Looking at it, the only thing you could hit from US silos launched so that they look like they're hitting North Korea would maybe be Hong Kong. Which once those missiles go past North Korea, China is already considering it a first strike and retaliating, so you didn't really gain anything.